'Classical porticos'
and 'touches of eastern splendour':
the appearance of the Victorian Turkish bath

 

                
This is a single frame, printer-friendly page taken from

one of the linked parts of an article published on Malcolm Shifrin's website

Victorian Turkish Baths: their origin, development, and gradual decline

        

Original illustrated page with notes and links

                           

 

                        
2: The Turkish bath as a facility

But the Turkish bath is also a facility—the area, or building in which bathers took their Turkish baths. Later on, such establishments also included showers, perhaps a steam room, and sometimes a cold plunge pool.

However, these were all additional to the Turkish bath process, and not part of it. The Victorian Turkish bath itself was not a process during which bathers came into contact with steam.

Yet writers frequently persist in referring to Victorian Turkish baths as vapour baths, or equating them to steam baths or hammams. The differences between the Victorian Turkish bath, on the one hand, and the hot-air baths found in Turkey and the Islamic world, on the other, are important

For if a minor mythology of the bath is not to gain credence as a result of seeing things which were mostly not there, or did not appear till much later, we need to understand why the first Victorian baths were built, and how they were seen by their promoters.

It is, of course, confusing that the English-speaking world sees such baths as Turkish baths, and that until recently French-speakers saw them as bains turcs.

More logically, perhaps, German-speakers, linking recent history with the more distant past, refer to them as Roman-Irish baths. This isn’t a reference, as one writer maintained, to the old Irish sweat bath (also to be found, incidentally, in American Indian cultures) but to the fact that the first Victorian Turkish bath was built in Co.Cork by the Irish physician, Dr Richard Barter, who, after some preliminary experiments, based it more closely on the Roman bath.

Barter owned a hydropathic establishment at St Ann’s Hill, near Blarney. He had earlier found that the sweat needed to remove, or at least alleviate, the pain of such complaints as gout and rheumatism, was more easily attained in a vapour bath than in the uncomfortable wet-sheet packing of the cold water cure practised by the followers of Vincent Priessnitz.

In 1856 Barter read The Pillars of Hercules in which David Urquhart described the hot-air baths he patronised when First Secretary at the British embassy in Constantinople.

The air in the hottest room was described as being dry, and Barter knew that the therapeutic effectiveness of hot air increased with its temperature, and that the body is able to withstand dry heat at greater temperatures than wet heat.

Barter contacted Urquhart, successfully inviting him to St Ann’s to help him build what Urquhart, and earlier travellers, had called a hammam, or ‘Turkish bath’. Urquhart later admitted that he had originally written the chapters on the Turkish bath twenty years before The Pillars was published, and he had not originally realised how humid the air in the hammams had been.

The Islamic adoption of hot-air baths from the eastern Roman empire, and their subsequent adaptation for ritual cleansing, led to the use of washing facilities within the hot rooms, inevitably giving rise to wet floors, humidity and general dampness.

But, originally for medical reasons, the ideal Victorian Turkish bath was one in which any showers, washing facilities, or pools were located apart from the hot rooms so that the air within them was kept as comfortably dry as possible.

Yet so closely is our present vision of Turkish baths fixated on steam that the author of a recent paper can claim, after examining a handful of Irish establishments built between 1857 and 1863, that all Turkish baths in Ireland seemed to follow a similar plan.

This plan featured ‘a central chimney disguised as a tower’. Its purpose was to carry ‘excess steam away from the bathing chambers’. Inside the building, the guiding decorative principle was the use of ‘surfaces that could withstand the high levels of steam required in the treatment of patients.’

So it is necessary to insist that any such chimneys, like those adjacent to other  buildings  such  as  swimming  pools  and  factories,  were designed to allow smoke and combustion gases produced in the furnace to escape at a height sufficient to minimise fire risk and, in this instance, to keep fumes as far as possible from the low-level intake of fresh air which, after heating, will be inhaled by the bathers.

3: Roman bath or Turkish bath?

 

 
 

               
The original page includes thumbnail pictures which can be enlarged.
All the enlarged images, listed and linked below, can also be printed.

Blackburn: Richmond Terrace

Bradford: the Manchester Road Baths

Bray: Dargan Terrace

Dr Richard Barter

Dublin: Lincoln Place

Dublin: Upper Sackville Street

Dunkerque: les Bains turcs

Hot room at Al Salsila, Damascus, Syria

Limerick: Military Road

Roman-Irish baths at Baden-Baden

St Ann’s Hill, near Blarney

Separation of wet and dry areas in the Turkish bath

Title page of The Pillars of Hercules

Vincent Priessnitz

Wet sheet packing

Top of the page

 

 

All complete pages,
with images, footnotes,
glossary & bibliography,
can be reached from the

Printer-friendly single frame
versions of all text pages
(and from them, all images)
can be reached from the

You can bookmark this page

Home Page

You can print this page

Site Map

Victorian Turkish Baths: their origin, development, and gradual decline

Comments and queries are most welcome and can be sent to:

malcolm@victorianturkishbath.org

The right of Malcolm Shifrin to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him
in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988